The Velvet Underground (2021)

[James Luckard]

Originally Posted by thatguamguy

The problem is that broad social satire isn't covered under parody law; they would have to tie the commentary specifically to Barbie itself in order to mount a fair use parody defense. That could be done, but it would require some expert witnesses and a good lawyer or team of lawyers, so the defense would not be cheap to mount, and I don't think they'd be able to convince the court that the case was so meritless that Mattel should pay their court costs. There are a bunch of reasons I wouldn't want to see the case, but I would be really curious to read a trial transcript, see the arguments both sides would make, and read the ultimate ruling, because I think there are a lot of complicating factors in this specific example that would be fascinating to see dissected.

But that all seems moot anyway as long as the music is still in there. I'm surprised that they even had a screening (I bet it wasn't open to the public).

Yep, the argument would boil down to using Barbie's absurdly proportioned limbs and torso and the doll's iconic status as an "ideal female form" as a direct commentary on the dangerous social forces that caused Karen Carpenter's eating disorder, and I think they'd probably succeed, but you're right, it wouldn't be as easy a defense as the Aqua trial. However, I'm sure that case would be cited as precedent. I love the quotes from the judge's ruling on that one:

However, the United States District Court in California dismissed both parties’ claims, declaring “Mattel’s statements were non-actionable hyperbole” and that the song is a parody, “poking fun at both her and the plastic values she represents.”

Mattel attempted to appeal but were met with short shrift. Again dismissing both the trademark infringement and defamation claims, United States Court of Appeals circuit judge Alex Kozinski ruled: “The parties are advised to chill.”

https://variety.com/2022/film/news/b...ua-1235254222/